SECTION
ADVOCACY CYCLE STAGE 3: PLANNING – RISKS, CONCERNS AND CHALLENGES
F2 Advocacy Cycle Stage 3
Planning – Risks, concerns and challenges
Section F2 considers some of the most common threats, risks, concerns and challenges
that we might face in our advocacy work, together with suggestions for how to mitigate
and overcome them.
This section is included within Stage 3 of the Advocacy Cycle, as it is an integral part of planning
and deciding whether or not to advocate. If appropriate, it should be considered in conjunction
with Section G5 about advocacy in difficult political contexts.
Facilitator’s
notes
Tools
Training
exercises
This section explores a series of questions and answers. A training workshop facilitator
must be familiar with this material.
■
What are the risks involved in advocacy?
140
■
What are common concerns for Christians involved in advocacy?
142
■
How do we mitigate and manage risks and concerns?
143
This section introduces tools that can help us apply our learning in a practical way. In a
training workshop, they can be used as handouts.
TOOL 35: Advocacy
risk analysis
146
TOOL 36: Advocacy
risks mitigation chart
148
This section outlines interactive training exercises that can be used with groups, in order
to deepen understanding of the issues that have been raised and to practise application
of the tools that have been introduced. They are ideal for use in a training workshop.
EXERCISE 41:
Identifying and reducing risks in advocacy
EXERCISE 42: Overcoming
EXERCISE 43: Addressing
© TEARFUND 2014
149
common concerns with advocacy work
150
challenges facing Christians in advocacy
150
139
SECTION F2
ROOTS 1 AND 2 ADVOCACY TOOLKIT – PRACTICAL ACTION IN ADVOCACY
SECTION F2
Facilitator’s notes
What are
the risks
involved in
advocacy?
Everything we do involves risks. Whether we are aware of it or not, we constantly seek to avoid,
reduce or mitigate risks. For example, we take a risk when we drive a car because we know that
accidents happen. However, we can reduce the risk by wearing a seat belt, making sure we are
not too tired and driving in the daylight.
It is the same with advocacy. We need to consider the main risks we face as an organisation
before we undertake our advocacy work.
Some of the main risks of advocacy include:
140
■
Risks to reputation
Advocacy work can often be high profile. If an organisation makes any mistakes, these can
happen in the public domain, creating potential for damage to the organisation’s reputation.
For example: if an organisation relies on incorrect information, compromises its message,
claims to be speaking for people who have not been consulted, fails to represent them
accurately or does not deliver on promises made.
■
Risks to people
When an organisation speaks out in a difficult operating environment and/or on controversial
issues, it can be risky for the people involved in the advocacy work, and sometimes for
friends and colleagues in others parts of the world. For example: violence, threats of violence,
imprisonment and even death threats may be made against those doing the advocacy, their
friends and family, and against people in the communities affected by the advocacy issues.
There may also be psychological abuse against all those involved, including isolation in the
community or in the church.
■
Risks to property
Sometimes, an organisation’s advocacy messages may antagonise opponents. In extreme
circumstances, this could lead to violence, threats of violence or damage against
organisational property and personal property, particularly in countries where law
enforcement is weak. For example: forcible closure of buildings, confiscation of paperwork,
arson attacks on an office, theft of key documents, stealing livestock, burning crops or
polluting a water supply.
■
Risks to relationships
Sometimes new advocacy work can damage existing relationships with our advocacy allies,
supporters and decision-makers if they do not agree with the policy position or practice that
an organisation has adopted on a particular issue.
TEARFUND ROOTS RESOURCES
SECTION F2
ADVOCACY CYCLE STAGE 3: PLANNING – RISKS, CONCERNS AND CHALLENGES
CASE STUDY
ZIMBABWE
In Bulawayo, there was a season when water supplies dried up. The rains failed, the dams that
supply the city fell into disrepair and the pipes into people’s homes leaked. There were no
chemicals to purify the water and no water pumps. The city’s inhabitants found themselves
without a water supply.
The pastors of Churches in Bulawayo (CIB), a Tearfund partner, decided to take action. They hired
trucks, drove across the border and bought some water tanks. Upon their return, they met with
local authority officials, community leaders and church leaders to identify the communities most
in need of water. Then they located nearby boreholes and placed the tanks where everyone could
access them.
At the same time, they lobbied the government ministry responsible for water to do something
about the severe water shortages, starting with paying for repairs to the dams, on the basis
that everyone in Bulawayo had a legal right to access clean water. Their advocacy efforts were
publicised in the newspaper and on radio. Unfortunately, the government officials refused to
cooperate. CIB conducted a risk assessment, concluded they should continue to advocate and
carried on regardless.
■
Risks to finances
Advocacy work can sometimes divert resources away from other work, hindering the
effectiveness of that work. There may sometimes be a trade-off between undertaking
advocacy work and opportunities for funding. Occasionally, advocacy work can lead to the
people involved losing their job, livelihood or trade, or an organisation losing its funding.
There is also a trend, particularly among donors, towards increasing scrutiny about the
amount of finances that organisations invest in advocacy, and the impact that this has on
poverty reduction. Consistent monitoring, reviewing and evaluation are vital to ensure that
funds are not wasted on initiatives that are ill-advised or badly planned.
■
Risks to expectations
Advocacy can be a long-term process and change is unlikely to be rapid. An organisation
needs to create and manage realistic expectations among advocacy allies, supporters and
people in the communities affected by the advocacy issue, to ensure that anger, frustration
and disappointment are avoided.
■
Risks to legal status
Most organisations are regulated by laws and registered in such a way that they must not
engage in politics. Any advocacy work must remain within the remit of the law, and any
political engagement must be linked to the organisation’s purpose and status. Otherwise,
there is a risk that an organisation’s legal status may be damaged or revoked.
■
Risks to timing
Advocacy work often involves seizing a moment of opportunity to influence decision-makers.
There can be a risk if such a moment is missed, perhaps because of lack of awareness or a
focus on other issues.
© TEARFUND 2014
141
SECTION F2
What are
common
concerns for
Christians
involved in
advocacy?
ROOTS 1 AND 2 ADVOCACY TOOLKIT – PRACTICAL ACTION IN ADVOCACY
If Christians are not convinced that advocacy is biblical, or that it is important for the church,
they are unlikely to become involved, even if they are given reasons that are theological and
practical. It can be a good idea to anticipate some of these discussion points in advance, and to
consider possible responses. See Section B3 for more context.
REASON GIVEN
POSSIBLE RESPONSE
Romans 13 and 1 Peter 2:13–14
say that we are to obey the
state, not challenge it.
These verses do say that we should obey the state, but only when it does
not go against God’s law. The assumption here is that those in power
are God’s servants. However, what happens if those in authority are not
governing according to God’s laws? Daniel 6:10 gives us an example of a
godly man who intentionally disobeyed a state edict that went against
God’s laws. We cannot just sit back and watch a government abuse its
power and role as a servant of God. It is our role, both as citizens and as
Christians, to hold governments to account, so that the state fulfils its
God-given role in upholding right, punishing those who do wrong and
promoting human well-being.
Jesus says to love our enemies,
turn the other cheek and that ‘it
is mine to avenge’ (Matthew 5).
We are called to love our enemies. The focus of this teaching is not to
seek revenge, but to leave that to God.
Jesus says that the ‘poor will
always be with you’ (Mark 14:7).
He continues by saying ‘and you can help them any time you want’.
These words are a command rather than an option. The focus of the
passage is the anointing with perfume just days before his death and
resurrection, showing that the woman had recognised the meaning of
what was about to happen.
What really matters is that
people are saved, so we need to
concentrate on that. Advocacy
work does not bring salvation.
Christians are called to seek justice (Micah 6:8), plead the cause of
poor people (Proverbs 31:8-9), and stand in the gap for those who are
suffering (Ezekiel 22:30).
Jesus did not engage in political
activity.
Jesus did not take part in an organised political movement but he
challenged the authorities. For example, he spoke assertively regarding
the authorities (Luke 13:32), he cleansed the temple (John 2:13–16), and
he spoke out against injustice and oppression (Luke 11:42). We need to
seek a godly response to issues, which might involve advocacy work.
Politics is a dirty game. You
should not mix religion and
politics.
It is true that power can corrupt but, by choosing not to be involved
in politics, Christians leave it to others to make decisions that affect
everyone’s lives. We therefore fail to take seriously our responsibility for
stewardship. A good example of godly political engagement is Joseph,
when he governed Egypt and averted a famine (Genesis 41:41–57). (See
Section B3 for more information on advocates in the Bible.)
Christians have become involved
in advocacy work in the past and
disgraced the church.
The church has been discredited in the past by its involvement with
power, but it has been discredited because of the way it was done, not
because it was involved in the first place. We need to learn from the
past.
There are two kingdoms –
the kingdom of God and the
kingdom of this world. We live in
one and not the other.
There are two kingdoms. Christians are citizens of heaven (Philippians
3:20) but we live in the world. We are called to be salt and light
(Matthew 5:13) and to influence the world. We should not run away
from our responsibility.
The problem is that, if the church does not engage in advocacy work, it will be less effective
in bringing good news to the poor, because it will have failed in God’s calling to hold rulers to
142
TEARFUND ROOTS RESOURCES
SECTION F2
ADVOCACY CYCLE STAGE 3: PLANNING – RISKS, CONCERNS AND CHALLENGES
account in fulfilling their purpose, and it will have allowed injustice and poverty to continue
unchallenged. ‘For evil to prosper, all it takes is for good men to do nothing’ (Edmund Burke).
How do
we mitigate
and manage
risks and
concerns?
If any risk is too high, it is wise to consider alternative options for our advocacy, such as asking
an external spokesperson or overseas organisation to advocate on our behalf. However, there
may be some situations where the risk is so high that we cannot do any advocacy at all.
It is good practice to ensure that everyone involved is aware of the risk, is still happy to proceed
and is aware of what to do to minimise the risk. This will probably involve ensuring that they
know who to go to for help. It is worth remembering that, sometimes, there may be a bigger risk
in not doing advocacy than in going ahead with it.
CASE STUDY
GUATEMALA
As with many countries in Central America, Guatemala has seen a rapid growth in violence, both
real and threatened. This had repercussions for one Tearfund partner there because an integral
part of its community health development programme involved empowering poor and vulnerable
rural communities. The partner encouraged the communities to develop a voice as a group, which
they had not historically had, in order to claim their entitlements to access affordable health care
when they needed it. This gave many people a sense of value and dignity, as the partner opened
up opportunities and connections for them to access local authority decision-makers. However, it
was also costly.
During the course of their advocacy, the partner exposed fraud and corruption on a large scale
within the government. This was difficult for those involved because powerful people felt
threatened. Social change made them uncomfortable, and they feared their privileges would
be challenged and removed. Death threats and threats of violence and organisational closure
followed, as the government tried to clamp down and stifle their voice.
As a result, the partner developed a strategic plan of action for mitigating the risks involved. For
example, they agreed not to travel after dark, to install security lights at their office premises,
to put only certain information into the public domain and nothing that could identify specific
individuals, to always obtain receipts for expenditure, etc. They also decided to continue their
advocacy, despite the ongoing risks.
The most common risks and concerns associated with doing advocacy work can easily be
addressed and overcome if they are anticipated in advance. Below are some examples.
If we speak out, then we may be threatened or ostracised
■
If there is a potential risk, advocates and those affected by a situation should be aware of the
risk before any action is taken.
■
Use organisations outside the country if that is a safe option.
■
Undertake advocacy with others, as part of a network, alliance or coalition, in order to keep a
low profile and diffuse any potential backlash.
■
Cultivate strong relationships with trusted people in power, so that they can act as bridges to
others or help you if you get into difficulty.
■
Show respect to decision-makers and give them clear explanations if they ask for them.
© TEARFUND 2014
143
SECTION F2
ROOTS 1 AND 2 ADVOCACY TOOLKIT – PRACTICAL ACTION IN ADVOCACY
CASE STUDY
SENSITIVE LOCATION IN AFRICA
One Tearfund partner, working in a difficult political context, wanted to work with the local
church to implement its project. However, it faced the difficulty that, according to government
policy, ‘partners’ within this context were normally NGOs and the church was not registered.
The partner built relationships with the local government officials, and then used those
contacts to ask them to allow an exemption to this policy and for them to work temporarily
with the church. This was on the basis that, from this working relationship, a community-based
organisation would be set up by both, which could then be registered and could continue the
work. The local government was persuaded by this argument and allowed the partner to have an
exemption to the policy.
We do not know enough about the situation
■
Contact other organisations that are working on the same advocacy issue to see what
information they have and collate it together with the evidence and research that we
have done.
■
Join networks, coalitions and alliances that are working on the same advocacy issue. We
may find that collectively we have all the information and contacts we need.
Advocacy is confrontational
■
This is not always the case. Decision-makers in governments and other authorities are often
aware that there is a problem and will welcome suggestions as to how it can be solved.
■
Some of the best advocacy work is done collaboratively.
■
Take time to build relationships with decision-makers before we need to influence them, and
then it will be possible to be persuasive.
■
Avoid advocacy activities and tactics that could be seen as condemning or negative, or
publicly shaming government officials.
We are too small to make a difference
144
■
A well known quote says: ‘If you think you are too small to make a difference, you have never
been in bed with a mosquito!’ (Anita Roddick, founder of The Body Shop)
■
Ensure there is sufficient staff time and, if possible, sufficient budget allocated, to ensure that
advocacy is not forgotten or deprioritised.
■
Ensure our organisation’s example is consistent with our advocacy message, as this will
hold much more weight and credibility in any advocacy work, because decision-makers will
observe integrity rather than double standards.
■
Talk to as many other organisations as possible to find out whether they are acting on the
issue and whether they know of others who are.
■
Use the information and contacts we have to form networks, alliances and coalitions, as
there is power in joint advocacy with others.
■
Use a variety of advocacy methods and approaches to maximise our impact.
TEARFUND ROOTS RESOURCES
SECTION F2
ADVOCACY CYCLE STAGE 3: PLANNING – RISKS, CONCERNS AND CHALLENGES
CASE STUDY
SRI LANKA
A former Tearfund partner, Navajeevana, was working with people seeking freedom from drug
addiction. They wanted to respond to a major cigarette advertising campaign that was targeting
the ports of Galle and Colombo. An international tobacco company was using a yacht as its main
promotional strategy as well as distributing branded promotional materials. Schools were invited
to take their children on the yacht and Navajeevana felt this promoted a glamorous image of
smoking. Navajeevana visited schools and encouraged them to cancel any proposed visits to the
yacht in order to benefit and protect the children. Navajeevana decorated a bus to make it look
like a yacht and drove it round the local area, performing street drama and mocking the cigarette
company’s advertising slogans. When the yacht eventually arrived, there was little interest in the
advertising campaign. Local people also became more aware of the risks associated with smoking.
Advocacy can raise unrealistic expectations about how fast change can come
■
Ensure that the community participates in identifying the problems, proposing solutions
and assessing what chance they have of influencing change.
■
Establish a realistic advocacy strategy that takes account of the resources available, the
skills of the community, the accessibility of the targets and the likelihood of change.
■
Make sure that everyone has realistic expectations from the outset.
■
Ensure that our advocacy work is integrated into other existing development work.
Advocacy might lead to compromise for the
people involved and even for the organisation itself
■
Promote participatory processes to ensure that advocacy messages are developed by a
group of people.
■
Ensure that prayer underpins all actions, and there is clear understanding of any biblical
mandate for action.
■
Ensure that those affected by a situation represent themselves.
■
Ensure that different people have contact with decision-makers so that all contacts and
influence are not focused on one person.
■
Have a clear internal system of accountability.
For more suggestions, see TOOL 35: Advocacy risk analysis and TOOL 36: Advocacy risks
mitigation chart.
See also Section G5 on doing advocacy in difficult political contexts.
© TEARFUND 2014
145
HANDOUT
TOOL 35
SECTION F2 – ADVOCACY CYCLE STAGE 3: PLANNING – RISKS, CONCERNS AND CHALLENGES
Advocacy risk analysis
An advocacy risk analysis is a tool that allows us to examine the risks that we or our
organisations might face when we do advocacy. It forms the basis for risk management and crisis
prevention, and is based on a structured approach to thinking through threats, which is followed
by an evaluation of the likelihood that those events will occur, and the creation of a contingency
plan to mitigate and manage them.
There are several steps to take in a risk analysis:
STEP 4
STEP 3
STEP 2
STEP 1
STEP 1
Regular reviews
Manage risks
Estimate risks
Identify threats
Identify threats
The first step is to identify potential threats, making sure that none of them is overlooked. This
can be done by:
■
Working through a checklist, such as the one below, and noting the applicable threats
■
Deliberately trying to spot areas of vulnerability within an advocacy plan, for example in
relation to specific relationships, systems, structures, etc
■
Consulting with different people who might have different perspectives about the likely
impact of particular threats.
Potential types of threats include:
■
REPUTATIONAL Loss of credibility, lack of legitimacy, compromising of messages, reliance on
incorrect information, etc
■
PEOPLE Illness, intimidation, harassment, violence, imprisonment, death, etc
■
PROPERTY Forcible closure of buildings, confiscation of paperwork, arson attacks, theft of key
documents, etc
■
POLITICAL Changes in regimes, key decision-makers leaving office, public opinion,
government policy, foreign influence, etc
TOOL 35 continues on next page
146
ROOTS 1 AND 2
ADVOCACY TOOLKIT
© TEARFUND 2014
HANDOUT
SECTION F2 – ADVOCACY CYCLE STAGE 3: PLANNING – RISKS, CONCERNS AND CHALLENGES
■
OPERATIONAL External disruption to plans, loss of access to finances, failure to secure access
to decision-makers, revocation of legal status, etc
■
PROCEDURAL Lack of accountability, poor governance, inability to seize timely opportunities,
etc
■
PROJECT Cost over-runs, jobs taking too long, diversion of focus because of an emergency,
etc
STEP 2
■
FINANCIAL Fraud, bribery, diversion of funds, loss of jobs or livelihoods, etc
■
TECHNICAL Inability to accommodate advances in technology, technical failure, etc
■
NATURAL Threats from weather, natural disaster, accident, disease, etc
Estimate risks
The second step is to work out the likelihood of each threat being realised and to assess its
impact. One approach to this is to estimate the probability of the event occurring, and to
work out how much it would cost to set things right if it occurs, in terms of both finances and
relationships. This provides estimated values for each risk.
An alternative approach is to consider both the likely impact of the risk and the likelihood of the
risk occurring, grading them separately on a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 is very low and 5 is very high.
Multiply the numbers together and the higher the score, the higher the estimated risk.
STEP 3
Manage risks
The third step is to work out ways of managing the risks while acknowledging that some will
remain high despite your best efforts. This needs to be as cost-effective as possible, in light
of their estimated value. Sometimes, it may be better to accept the risk than to use excessive
resources to eliminate it. This should be done with wisdom, prayer and discernment.
Risks can be managed in a number of ways:
■
BY USING EXISTING RESOURCES Improvements in existing methods and systems, changes in
responsibilities, improvements to accountability and internal controls, etc.
■
BY CONTINGENCY PLANNING This involves deciding to accept a risk, but choosing to develop
a plan to minimise its effects if it happens. The plan allows for immediate action in the event
of the risk occurring and a crisis management situation.
■
BY INVESTING IN NEW RESOURCES This involves deciding whether to bring in additional
resources to counter the risk, or even insuring against the risk.
STEP 4
Regular reviews
The fourth step is to carry out regular reviews. This might involve formal reviews of the risk
analysis, perhaps each time there are changes in circumstances. It might also involve adapting
plans, allocating additional budget or alerting external contacts.
ROOTS 1 AND 2
ADVOCACY TOOLKIT
© TEARFUND 2014
147
HANDOUT
TOOL 36
SECTION F2 – ADVOCACY CYCLE STAGE 3: PLANNING – RISKS, CONCERNS AND CHALLENGES
Advocacy risks mitigation chart
It is wise to plan for all possible risks and consider ways of reducing them ahead of time. Below
is a chart that can be used as a tool for contingency planning to mitigate advocacy risks. It has
been partially completed with some sample suggestions.
Potential risks
Ways of reducing risks
Risk
manager
Damaged
organisational
reputation because of
reliance on incorrect
information or a lack
of evidence in support
of advocacy messages
Verify and triangulate information (use at least
three sources) before using it in discussions with
decision-makers
Specify
person with
responsibility
Lack of legitimacy
because of speaking
on behalf of a group
who have not been
consulted
Consult with the group on whose behalf you are
speaking
Disillusionment in the
affected communities
because of the length
of time taken to
achieve change
Be clear about what you will do and when, and what is
likely to be achievable and by when
Threats of violence,
or actual violence,
towards those who
are advocating
Build relationships with those in power who could help
you in difficult situations
Ensure all information has been sourced and accredited
correctly
Ensure sufficient factually accurate evidence has been
gathered before developing advocacy messages
Establish clear lines of accountability
Specify
person with
responsibility
Clarify the process for deciding who will be
stakeholders in the advocacy process
Manage expectations from the outset of the advocacy
work
Specify
person with
responsibility
Provide people with clear information during the
process to reduce disillusionment
Work in networks and alliances to give strength in
numbers
Specify
person with
responsibility
Work with allies outside the context who are not under
the same threat
Treat your opponents with respect so as not to cause
them to be violent
Political change and
instability, which
could damage
the impact and
effectiveness of the
advocacy
Be collaborative and avoid confrontation
A failure by Christians
to engage with
advocacy as an
approach to the
problem identified
Encourage engagement with materials outlining the
biblical basis for advocacy
Undertake contingency planning
Ensure advocacy actions are accountable and
transferable across different political scenarios
Empower affected communities to advocate
Work with established Christian leaders as much as
possible
Demonstrate by example that advocacy works
Share examples of what other Christian organisations
have done in advocacy
148
ROOTS 1 AND 2
Specify
person with
responsibility
ADVOCACY TOOLKIT
© TEARFUND 2014
Specify
person with
responsibility
SECTION F2
ADVOCACY CYCLE STAGE 3: PLANNING – RISKS, CONCERNS AND CHALLENGES
SECTION F2
Training exercises
EXERCISE 41
Identifying and reducing risks in advocacy
Aim
To understand how to identify advocacy risks and how to plan ways to reduce them
TYPE
Group exercise
TIPS
The first stage is light-hearted, only works in a group and could be used as an energiser. The
second stage is more serious, works best in small groups but could be used by individuals for
personal reflection.
METHODS
Small group work, brainstorming, reflection, plenary feedback and discussion
MATERIAL
Large pieces of paper (such as flipchart paper), pens
HANDOUTS
TOOL 35: Advocacy
TOOL 36: Advocacy
STEPS
(STAGE 1)
risk analysis
risks mitigation chart
1. Get everyone to stand in a circle with their right hands out to the side, palm flat and facing
up, and their left hands out to the side, fist clenched and thumbs sticking up.
2. On the count of three, everyone has to try to grab the thumb of the person on their right,
whilst avoiding their thumb being grabbed by the person on their left. They must not move
beforehand.
3. Ask people to share their experiences in plenary, and use this to link into the importance of
identifying and reducing risks in advocacy.
STEPS
(STAGE 2)
1. Divide everyone into small groups of three or four and give each group an advocacy case
study, preferably one that they have already considered.
2. Using TOOL 35: Advocacy risk analysis, ask each group to brainstorm the main threats that
might apply to their advocacy case study, and ask them to estimate the risks involved.
3. Give each group a piece of flipchart paper and pens.
4. Ask each group to draw a table on their paper, divided into three columns.
5. Label each column at the top: the first should say, ‘Potential risks’; the second, ‘Ways of
reducing risk’; and the third column, ‘Owner’. Use TOOL 36: Advocacy risks mitigation chart to
help.
6. Each group needs to transfer the risks they have identified into the first column. They then
need to discuss and agree together the approaches that they think should be applied to
reduce each risk. They also need to allocate an owner to take responsibility for each approach
suggested. Use TOOL 36: Advocacy risks mitigation chart as a sample to help.
7. Ask each group to feed back in plenary and facilitate a discussion to draw out the key
learning points.
© TEARFUND 2014
149
SECTION F2
EXERCISE 42
ROOTS 1 AND 2 ADVOCACY TOOLKIT – PRACTICAL ACTION IN ADVOCACY
Overcoming common concerns with advocacy work
Aim
To explore ways to overcome the most common concerns with advocacy work
TYPE
These exercises work well with a large group that can be sub-divided
METHODS
Work in pairs, small groups, role play, plenary discussion
MATERIAL
Sticky notes or blank cards
STEPS
(VERSION 1)
1. In advance, write the most common concerns people have on separate blank cards.
2. Split the group into pairs.
3. Give each pair one or two cards.
4. Invite them to discuss how these concerns could be addressed and overcome.
5. Encourage feedback to the plenary for discussion.
STEPS
(VERSION 2)
1. In advance, write the most common concerns people have on separate blank cards.
2. Divide participants into small groups.
3. Give each group an advocacy case study, preferably one that they are familiar with. Also, give
each group one or two sticky notes or blank cards.
4. Invite participants to prepare a short drama based on the case studies, illustrating how the
concerns on the sticky notes or cards might be overcome.
5. Encourage comments from the observers in plenary and draw out key learning points in
discussion.
EXERCISE 43
Addressing challenges facing Christians in advocacy
Aim
To understand and address the challenges facing Christians in advocacy work. This exercise
emphasises the importance of church involvement in advocacy work in the specific
contexts and experiences of participants and shows how it is part of integral mission.
TYPE
Group exercise
METHODS
STEPS
Small groups, presentations, case studies, plenary discussion
1. Invite two or three participants to share their experiences of church involvement, or lack of
involvement, in advocacy work.
2. Discuss some of the challenges that the churches faced, what they did well and what they
might have done differently if similar challenges arose again.
3. Split participants into small groups and ask them to answer the following questions and then
to present their answers to the plenary:
Ǧ †™’ŽŒ™‡Š†••—”•—Ž†™ŠŽ˜˜šŠ˜‹”—™Šˆš—ˆ™”†‰›”ˆ†™Š†‡”š™lj
Ǧ †™Ž“™Š—“†‘Ž˜˜šŠ˜’ŽŒ™™Šˆš—ˆ“ŠŠ‰™”†‰‰—Š˜˜Ž“”—‰Š—™”‡Šˆ”’ŠŽ“›”‘›Š‰Ž“
advocacy work?
Ǧ †™†—Š™Š‘ŽŠ‘žˆ”“˜Š–šŠ“ˆŠ˜Ž‹™Šˆš—ˆ‰”Š˜“”™Š“Œ†ŒŠŽ“†‰›”ˆ†ˆžœ”—lj
4. If appropriate, have a time of prayer, during which participants can ask God for wisdom in
their work in their own churches, communities and organisations.
150
TEARFUND ROOTS RESOURCES